Chinese vs Ghanaian Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 47,850,329 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Ghanaians within Chinese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.114. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chinese within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.063% in Ghanaians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chinese corresponds to a decrease of 62.6 Ghanaians.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($77,465 compared to $60,043, a difference of 29.0%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($116,156 compared to $97,277, a difference of 19.4%), and median household income ($98,496 compared to $83,582, a difference of 17.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($41,461 compared to $40,429, a difference of 2.5%), median earnings ($48,836 compared to $46,440, a difference of 5.2%), and median male earnings ($56,872 compared to $52,810, a difference of 7.7%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in child poverty among boys under 16 (11.9% compared to 18.9%, a difference of 59.1%), family poverty (6.5% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 58.0%), and married-couple family poverty (3.6% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 57.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (15.4% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 8.2%), single mother poverty (24.6% compared to 29.4%, a difference of 19.2%), and single male poverty (11.0% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 20.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (5.9% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 41.6%), female unemployment (4.5% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 32.6%), and unemployment (4.7% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 28.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.3% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 3.5%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 17.7%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.1% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 19.0%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.6% compared to 35.3%, a difference of 9.2%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 74.3%, a difference of 4.0%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.7% compared to 67.1%, a difference of 3.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (85.1% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 0.26%), in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.41%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.0% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 0.50%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.2% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 52.0%), single father households (2.0% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 22.7%), and married-couple households (50.4% compared to 42.2%, a difference of 19.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.34 compared to 3.29, a difference of 1.7%), family households (68.1% compared to 63.5%, a difference of 7.4%), and divorced or separated (11.2% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 7.9%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 100.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (8.8% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 68.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 45.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.9% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 9.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.1% compared to 48.0%, a difference of 25.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 45.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.5% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 73.7%), college, under 1 year (68.3% compared to 63.9%, a difference of 6.9%), and college, 1 year or more (62.2% compared to 58.4%, a difference of 6.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.6% compared to 97.5%, a difference of 1.1%), kindergarten (98.5% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 1.1%), and 1st grade (98.5% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ghanaian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.7% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 44.3%), disability age 5 to 17 (4.7% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 23.7%), and cognitive disability (15.9% compared to 18.3%, a difference of 14.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female disability (12.3% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 2.3%), disability age over 75 (48.7% compared to 47.5%, a difference of 2.5%), and self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 3.7%).